Eight speakers at the April 18 City Council meeting denounced the City’s deceptive PR video on the City Manager’s traffic stop. Contrary to what the Mayor said, the City didn’t release the video “in the interest of transparency.” They did it only after a four-month battle to block complying with two California Public Records Act requests. A specialized Los Angeles law firm costing tens of thousands of dollars was hired to help in that blocking effort. Who authorized this? They supplied few documents – three emails, two phone records, one screenshot and one text. Three additional letters were needed to get this information. The dispatch log was released only because it might aid the City Manager. Many more documents are still being withheld.
On the day the CPRA was filed, Nov. 18, an initial inquiry to the Police Department was made at 9:08 a.m. This was followed by an 11:24 a.m. email from the City Manager to City Council explaining her ticket. Who from the Police Department informed her of the pending CPRA that wasn’t officially filed until 2:55 p.m. that day?
Then the coverup began in earnest. On Nov. 23, Captain Nichols met with Officer Gregg to “explain” why what he reported was incorrect. On Nov. 29 at 8:21 a.m., Officer Gregg asks Captain Nichols why another meeting with the Chief and City Manager is being held. He expresses concern over the intent of the meeting, “I understand it was a clarification meeting about the CM’s comments and my concerns about the integrity of her statements at the time of the stop.” Only then, at 11:46 a.m., does Captain Nichols send Chief Calvert a report documenting what happened at the meeting six days earlier with Officer Gregg. Chief Calvert then sends this email to the City Manager at 2:16 p.m. Why all these meetings? Why was it necessary to “explain” to Officer Gregg what he saw while denying him access to his own body cam footage? Why are they informing the City Manager? Isn’t there an obvious conflict of interest because she is the defendant?
Why did the City produce an edited and false version of the body cam footage? Why was the tape speeded up twice, obscuring the initial offense time? Why did they say Officer Gregg asked the City Manager if she was using her cell phone while driving when he never said that? Why list the “event” time as 9:09 a.m. when it happened 44 seconds earlier when Officer Gregg spotted her on Coast Highway at Anita?
Why all this staff time, money for a specialized law firm and misinformation to hide the City Manager’s simple traffic stop? Undoubtedly there’s more coverup behind the scenes.
Michèle Monda, Laguna Beach
![Pinterest](https://pinterest.com/pin/create/button/?url=https://www.lagunabeachindy.com/letter-more-cover-up-behind-the-scenes/&media=https://www.lagunabeachindy.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/letters.jpg&description=Eight speakers at the April 18 City Council meeting denounced the City's deceptive PR video on the City Manager's traffic stop. Contrary to what the Mayor said, the City didn't release the video "in the interest of transparency.){kind=link}
Michele, take a page from Louis Armstrong:
I see trees of green
Red roses too
I see them bloom
For me and you
And I think to myself
What a wonderful world
I see skies of blue
And clouds of white
The bright blessed day
The dark sacred night
And I think to myself
What a wonderful world
The colors of the rainbow
So pretty in the sky
Are also on the faces
Of people going by
I see friends shaking hands
Saying how do you do
They’re really saying
I love you
I hear babies cry
I watch them grow
They’ll learn much more
Than I’ll ever know
And I think to myself
What a wonderful world
Yes, I think to myself
What a wonderful world
Ooh, yes
Blame Trump
Billy – incisive insight into the coverup that the city is running for the City Manager. I’m glad you reasoned it out and came up with facts to support your theory of . . . . what????? I’d love to hear how you explain all the questionable acts in the factual timeline. Please be specific in the telling.
Yeah, let’s just brush it under the rug, if she used her position to get out of something, then let’s just forget about it, right? I love people that will stand up and be counted when from all appearances and real cam footage are counted ..there was a problem, the point again, if this small incident needed to put a good police officer on stress leave, cost the tax payers thousands of dollars, people lying, laws being broken then the question begs, what is happening at city hall? People standing their ground is admirable, pushing forward when all the nasty remarks are made is admirable..and yes, I wonder who really did the so called vandalism at the CM house, who got the most out of that…who got all the attention for that and who did that serve? sweep sweep.. What a wonderful world.
I see blue Lights Flash
Red Lights too
I see motor a Motor Officer say “Pull Over You”
And I think to my self “what is he trying to do”?
I see Skies of blue
I see clouds of White
But I just need to circumvent the ticket that he is about to write
and I think to myself “I’ll get out of this too”.
The color of authority that I attempted to impart
so petty and self serving really wasn’t very smart
and I think to myself, “a cover up I will start”
I see distorted facts, I see altered events,
Saying what really occurred is not at all relevant
and I think to myself, “all the facts we obscured”.
They’ll learn much more than they should ever know
If we do not doctor the body-cam video
and I think to myself what a wonderful world
OOH YES! What a Wonderful World!
None of this would be an issue if she were Black.
It’s White Supremacy that’s the real problem here.
The writers.
The writer touts: “EIGHT speakers denounced”!
OK.
What about the other 22,787 people living in Laguna that didn’t “demounce”? (like a formal word will legitimize her)
0.04% of us show up and she’s on a Wharton rant about The CM?
Worry about your own $,$$$,$$$.04 clan.
Dustin, although only eight residents actually showed up at the City Council meeting on 04/21/23 to “denounce” the CM’s attempt to circumvent the issuance of her deserved ticket by “dropping” Police Chief Calvert’s name.
You might want to take a look at the Poll that the Laguna Beach Independent ran last week. The Poll asked the following:
“Was it appropriate for the City Manager to state Police Chief’s name when stopped for a traffic violation”.
The polls results were: TOTAL VOTES: 2,212
NO VOTES: 1,325 * CM Should Not have Name Dropped
YES VOTES: 887 * CM was OK to drop the chief’s name.
So, Dustin there are at least 1,325 citizens that feel the City Managers actions were improper. So, it appears that more than the 8 citizens that spoke out at the CC Meeting feel that the CM’s actions were in fact inappropriate. As for the other 21,462 residents I cannot speak for them. I assume some of the residents are children. Others just do not follow City Government or they could not make the CC Meeting. In any case your .04% is misleading and fundamentally wrong, incorrect, inaccurate, etc. etc.
By the way the issue is not really that she attempted to get out of the ticket through intimidation, the real issue is that she attempted to cover it up by resisting the release of the body-cam video and when the City did release the body-cam video they produced a doctored video to present the CM in a more favorable light. It’s as simple as that, public officials need to be accountable for their actions.
Dustin, just for clarification of your Letter to the Editor, I looked into the Laguna Beach Census figures and extrapolated the data so that you and the readers of this column would have a clearer understanding as to how many Laguna Residents in fact believe that the Laguna Beach City Manager acted inappropriately when she informed Officer Gregg that she was on a call to Jeff Calvert (Laguna Beach Chief of Police) when pulled over for using a hand held device while driving.
The 07/01/21 Census data shows the population of Laguna Beach as: 22,795 residents. Of this number 18.2% are under the age of 18. We can exclude the minors as they are not of voting age. Residents: 22,795 less 4,148 minors equals 18,647 remaining “eligible” residents.
The Laguna Beach Independent survey concluded that 1,325 responders to their survey believed that the City Managers actions were inappropriate. The 1,325 is over 7% of the of the voting population of Laguna! Your figure of .04% is not even close, you missed it by over 6.96%. Whoops!
If you are going to throw out numbers you should at least make sure they are correct, and not misleading, right?